[whattajoke]

you’ve managed to IGNORE the myriad refutations of that chart here on FR for the past few years

Riiiight. I also ignore my 3 yr old when he's being petulant and not making any sense. Same thing.

most are ligit- however they fall squarely into two distinct camps- fully human, or fully ape.

Interesting. Whatever that means. Is there "fully human" fossil evidence of "full humans" who no longer inhabit earth? Why? What happened to them? I suspect you'll say that they are all apes on there, even though it would be very tough to say so in light of the full fossil record.

Are lungfish and mudskippers "fully fish?"

There is NOTHING in either creation science or ID that claims there aren’t genetic variations WITHIN the kinds

One last point and one more question: Define "kind" and I hope you do realize that the inventor of ID and its lead proponent (and money-maker), Dr. Behe accepts common decent and would tell you without hesitation that Coyoteman's chart is accurate and true.

[jimmyray]

I also ignore my 3 yr old when he's being petulant

Ad hominem, no substance. Are lungfish and mudskippers "fully fish?"

Red Herring. Coelacanth are fully fish, so what? Are suggeting their skulls should be placed in Coyoteman's chart? :)

one more question: Define "kind"

I would assert the definition would be similar to that of Genus, and about as robust as our human abilities will allow. Try defining Genus in a way that all "scientists" agree and abide by it. I will acknowledge that defining "kind" is a very difficult thing to do. But I can provide a few: Cat kind (tiger, leopard, house cat, etc.), Dog, Turtle, Horse, etc.

Dr. Behe accepts common decent

Share with me your definition of "evolution". Needs to be much more specific than "Climate Change", BTW.

[CottShop]

One last point and one more question: Define “kind” and I hope you do realize that the inventor of ID and its lead proponent (and money-maker), Dr. Behe accepts common decent and would tell you without hesitation that Coyoteman’s chart is accurate and true.]]

I coudl care less what Behe beleives OUTSIDE of the actual science and evidnece- they can beleive little green frogs turn into princes when kissed by princesses if he likes- it’s irrelevent to the actual facts- quite a number of scientists beleive common descentt- big deal- the evidence shows otherwise- discontinuity- NOT continuity- and guess what? Lot’s of scientists agree and would not agree one bit with coyoteman’s chart- Are you suggesting a pissing match here? Go pick one with someone else- I’m ONLY itnerested in the science-

As for your other questiosn you will finsd all the answersonline

[[Riiiight. I also ignore my 3 yr old when he’s being petulant and not making any sense. Same thing.]]

Yep- just clamp your hands tightly over your eyes, ignore the evidences, and claim those bringign the evidneces are being ‘petulent’ Swell defense for Macroevolution I must tell you.